From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 19 21:55:58 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07BAF16A41F; Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:55:58 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from matthias.andree@gmx.de) Received: from mail.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de (krusty.dt.E-Technik.uni-dortmund.de [129.217.163.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23A5043D46; Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:55:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from matthias.andree@gmx.de) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id D122344129; Mon, 19 Dec 2005 22:55:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (krusty [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 01976-10; Mon, 19 Dec 2005 22:55:54 +0100 (CET) Received: from m2a2.dyndns.org (p5091366B.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.145.54.107]) by mail.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 086A0440A8; Mon, 19 Dec 2005 22:55:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by merlin.emma.line.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 538E7201F1F; Mon, 19 Dec 2005 22:55:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from m2a2.dyndns.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (m2a2.dyndns.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 06378-10; Mon, 19 Dec 2005 22:55:51 +0100 (CET) Received: by merlin.emma.line.org (Postfix, from userid 500) id 4717B201F20; Mon, 19 Dec 2005 22:55:51 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 22:55:51 +0100 From: Matthias Andree To: "Cai, Quanqing" Message-ID: <20051219215551.GA7362@merlin.emma.line.org> Mail-Followup-To: "Cai, Quanqing" , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-fs@freebsd.org References: <20051213151908.GA26821@crodrigues.org> <20051216151228.GA34670@crodrigues.org> <20051217141647.GC27992@merlin.emma.line.org> <2b22951e0512172355k36a579f4i42dd72562a3530ed@mail.gmail.com> <20051218092523.GA4694@merlin.emma.line.org> <2b22951e0512191348t227c9354i36d6a4a87e7d5698@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2b22951e0512191348t227c9354i36d6a4a87e7d5698@mail.gmail.com> X-PGP-Key: http://home.pages.de/~mandree/keys/GPGKEY.asc User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Matthias Andree , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: XFS (read-only) support committed to CURRENT X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:55:58 -0000 On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, Cai, Quanqing wrote: > No, I don't have time to deal with SuSE regarding failure, the company > I am working for is growing so fast, need to add dozens of servers > every month. After switch to XFS, I seldom get problems, even if I got > problem, I can quickly reboot nfs server because it is using XFS. Well, you can switch off the routine full checks of ext3fs with tune2fs, should that matter for remaining ext3 file systems.s Without that full check every few weeks, you only have journal recovery, and that is pretty fast. The journal can be offloaded on a separate drive if desired. On the downside, ext3fs and write caches don't mix well, unless you have battery backup units sitting on your RAID controllers (I do, and switching this MegaRAID - RAID5 on 2+1 - to writeback mode improved write speed by a factor of 5 - no database loads though). > > OTOH, it's "only" one Xeon NFS server with 1 70 GB RAID5 and 1 292 GB > > RAID5 (MegaRAID SCSI 320-1 with BBU) with half a dozen users at any one > > time. > > Oh, you don't put much load on it. I am using nfs server as storage > server of internet application, so they get very high IO load. Yup. And personally, if I'd have any stakes in NFS load, I'd probably consider Solaris instead. Linux and NFS is pretty flakey for some, and some people claim only 2.6.11.11 were really stable, I always see tons of fixes for NFS :-/. Myself, I have little NFS troubles with SUSE 9.2 and 10.0, but things used to be worse. > Anyway, I am not tend to start a flame war between ext3 and XFS, I > choose ext3 for our MySQL server because MySQL.com suggest me that, > they said ext3 has better performance. Sorry, this is out of topic:( I'm taking this offline. MySQL is an area I don't know well, whenever I've wanted SQL, I've used SQLite3 or PostgreSQL, so I cannot comment on that. -- Matthias Andree